United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Hilarious Blacksmith Uses Science To Shut Down Insane ‘Fire Can’t Melt Steel’ 9/11 Truthers
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/17 ... -cant-melt-steel-911-truthers/
Published: Dec 17, 2015
Author: The Federalist Staff
Post Date: 2015-12-17 14:38:47 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 17350
Comments: 60
Give this man a medal. In just two minutes, blacksmith Trenton Tye of Purgatory Ironworks uses science to hilarious effect to mock 9/11 truthers who insist the 2001 terrorist attacks were a conspiracy. And why are these nutters convinced the whole thing was an inside job? Because fire can’t melt steel (Seriously, read through that entire 9/11 conspiracy theory thread. It is amazing.) Tye, a professional metalworker based in Georgia, has had enough. He filmed the following video to prove to science-hating 9/11 conspiracy mongers once and for all that structural steel will absolutely lose its structural integrity if it gets too hot: “So I am taking time out of my busy day to try to put to rest one of the more moronic things I have seen on the Internet lately, and that’s saying something,” Tye tells the camera. “‘Jet fuel only burns at 1,500 degrees and since steel melts at 2,700 degrees, 9/11 was a conspiracy!'” “What I am upset about is the retarded metallurgical things that you guys are saying. I’m not arguing the facts,” Tye says. “Jet fuel does in fact burn at 1,500 degrees. Some carbon steels will start melting at 2,300 degrees. But if you hold this up as a reason for conspiracy, you are an idiot!” To prove his point, Tye compared the structural strength of a room-temperature piece of steel to the strength of one that had been heated to 1,800 degrees in his workshop’s furnace. “It’s very hot, but not melted,” Tye notes by tapping the piece of steel on an anvil. “Half-inch solid steel. Check it out,” Tye says as he bends the solid steel rod back and forth using only his pinkie finger. “It’s a freakin’ noodle!” “Your argument is invalid. Get over it!” Tye exclaims as he drops the mic by dropping the glowing steel rod. “Find a job!” We salute you, Trenton Tye. You are a real American hero. Godspeed.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 37.
#9. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
Question: How many here have read the official NIST reports? Every board has this video up right now and most of the comments prove that few people have any idea what the official conspiracy theory is at all. This guy didn't prove anything about 911. Below are a few important excerpts from the official NIST NCSTAR 1A WTC 7 final document. Note that the max temp in 7 per NIST was 900 Centigrade, 1650 F. But that was only a small area. Most temps were around 400-600 C. Temp of Self Cleaning Oven- 500 C. The most important sentence: Thus, WTC 7 did not collapse due to fire induced weakening of critical columns Source: http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610 (The Official PDF does not allow copy & paste.)
But how many people are going to differentiate that the blacksmith was only talking about the Twin Towers, not WTC 7. Certainly, I had that distinct impression throughout his talk. Typically, when people discuss WTC 7, they mention that name. Clearly, no jet hit it so it is different from the Towers. As for the collapse of WTC 7, I'm not sure how many people will care deeply that the official report blamed the heat expansion of column 79, leading to the collapse of columns 80 & 81, followed by a general structural collapse via pancaking. Maybe it is a bigger source of controversy than I am aware of.
7WTC collapse was admitted to have been proven to have achieved gravitational acceleration for over two seconds. That is a physical impossibility if pancaking is occurring. The is no official theory of the collapse mechanism of 7WTC. The official theory goes to the point of collapse initiation, states that collapse was inevitable at that point. The end. And it took something like 6 or 7 years to say that much.
NIST admits almost 4 seconds. The only way for that to happen is if there's nothing underneath. Part 2 and 3 at Youtube NIST.GOV: Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (09/17/2010, ARCHIVE, incorporated into 9/19/2011 update) In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics? In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail. To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky. The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-9%20Vol%202.pdf). The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse: Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall). This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm Almost no one has read the official docs.
Free fall from the 1.75 second mark until the 4 second mark is 2.25 seconds of free fall. Collapse at gravitational acceleration is incompatible with the pancaking of floors, whether it be for 2 or 4 seconds. I should make clear that I know of nothing that fully explains the observed phenomena with all the buildings.
There are no replies to Comment # 37. End Trace Mode for Comment # 37.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#10. To: Operation 40 (#9)
#28. To: TooConservative, Operation 40 (#10)
As for the collapse of WTC 7, I'm not sure how many people will care deeply that the official report blamed the heat expansion of column 79, leading to the collapse of columns 80 & 81, followed by a general structural collapse via pancaking.
#33. To: nolu chan (#28)
(Edited)
7WTC collapse was admitted to have been proven to have achieved gravitational acceleration for over two seconds.
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity
#37. To: Operation 40 (#33)
NIST admits 4 seconds. The only way for that to happen is if there's nothing underneath.
Replies to Comment # 37.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]